The Initiative Black People in Germany (ISD-Bund) e.V. deeply condemns the reaction of the taz editorial staff to the events that took place around the discussion panel “Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear N-Words and Inside” at taz.lab 2013.
The event of Saturday, 20.04.13 ended in a scandal due to the disrespectful behavior of the moderator and taz journalist Deniz Yücel. However, this was only the beginning of a series of misdemeanors that the organizers of the taz.lab in 2013 and the taz’s editors-in-chief have committed since then. Not only were Yücel’s unprofessional outbursts downplayed in the online article published that same evening, but the reactions of editor-in-chief Ines Pohl and taz.lab curator Jan Feddersen to the complaints of author and ISD activist Sharon Dodua Otoo were unsatisfactory, to say the least. Mr. Feddersen’s message contained only condolences and a reference to Mr. Yücel’s supposedly anti-racist stance. Mr. Yücel should have at least called this into question, if not refuted it, not only on the podium, but also with his article “Dear N-words, you’ve got a bang” from Monday, April 22, 13. Instead of a deeper research, he prefers there to make as many provocative claims as possible about the audience, an allegedly planned “demolition” of the panel discussion, but also about our work as an association. This reveals not only Yücel’s ignorance of historical contexts, but also, once again, his unwillingness to engage with the question of why both black people and many white people would not want to be confronted, gratuitously and repeatedly, within a public event with a term historically and also currently associated with racist violence.
The term “Negro” (hereafter N-word) is by no means a now harmless artifact of times past. On the contrary, it is still used in connection with violent crime and everyday discrimination against Black people in Germany. The 350-year history of violence of the term in Germany should be reason enough for a sensitive handling of it. The N-word was integral to racist concepts that legitimized political violence; it was used for centuries in the planning and “legalization” of crimes against humanity: From the Brandenburg enslavement trade and racism in the Enlightenment, to racist colonial policies, to forced castration and murder in the Third Reich, to the discussion of racist policies against Black Germans in the Bundestag of the 1950s, the German line of tradition in the realm of state policies – not to mention societal racism – stretches back. We do not understand how the taz can allow Mr. Yücel to trivialize colonialism in his column, to set genocides off against each other and thus relativize them. To name only one significant historical blind spot in his text: The genocide he describes in Rwanda cannot be understood without the fixation of the previously more flexible categories “Hutu” and “Tutsi” made during the German colonial period and justified by racist theories. The fact that these connections are still too little known in the white German mainstream does not relieve journalists of their responsibility to provide a well-founded account through research – quite the contrary. The unreflective relativization of genocides and crimes against humanity is contrary to the self-image of the taz.
Furthermore, by quoting the African-American human rights activist Martin Luther King Jr., Yücel tries to cover up his misconduct and to play down the history of violence just described. ISD would like to object to this as well. The American term “Negro” cannot simply be equated or translated with the German N-word. The terms have a specific history in each case. Neither was the N-word used at any time in Germany as a neutral designation for Black people, nor by these themselves as a self-designation in the context of their fight for equal rights.It is also disappointing that the editors-in-chief in their statement of 25.04.13 on the “taz Hausblog”, only in a subordinate clause Yücel’s alleged apology mentions and praises their author in the same breath generalizing for his provocative texts. That he is an author who tests boundaries and does not let himself be held back by taboos and traditions. Even by means of satire that hurts. Of course, a newspaper like the taz thrives on the diversity of its viewpoints. However, certain limits must be set here as well. Opinion and polemics should also be based on factual information and fundamental respect for experiences of oppression. Ms. Otoo was an invited guest on the taz.lab panel and, like many of the Black audience members present – including members of the ISD – was not treated with the respect she deserved. Printing Ms. Otoo’s statement initially appears to be an insightful gesture on the part of the taz. However, the relativizing text in the box next to it makes it clear that the newspaper lacks the will to deal with political differences and conflicts in a sovereign manner.
The taz’s relationship with a broad public critical of racism has long been considered strained. This incident is another example of barricading behind a defensive line. It is about time that the taz, as well as the broader society, finally takes a critical look at the issue of racism and language. It’s time for the mainstream to take seriously the voices of those who are usually considered the so-called Others. It is important to recognize them as experts in the field of racism and diversity and to win them over for the media structures in the long term.
We expect a detailed statement and substantive discussion of the taz with the events outlined by us and the counterstatement of Otoo, as well as an apology, which can also be interpreted as such. In this specific case, the taz thus has the opportunity to reaffirm its self-image as an emancipative medium – or to turn away from it.
Board of Directors, Initiative Schwarze Menschen in Deutschland (ISD-Bund) e.V.
Berlin, 31.05.2013
download – Open Letter to the taz incl. of the co-signers